System Info

Teachers and Guns

From Richard Claunch@VERT/SELDOM to All on Wed Apr 30 07:52:06 2014

Do you recall the shooting in the schools? If teachers were carrying consealed weapons many lives including the teachers lives would be saved. I believe personal crime would be much lower. In the 1800's persons carried side arms for personal protection. Today police do not protect people they take a report after your father mother child was attacked.

Do you recall the shooting in the schools? If teachers were carrying consealed weapons many lives including the teachers lives would be saved.

ummm... totally wrong answer. these kids aren't even allowed to buy guns, they get them from adults who have too many to keep track of and bring them to school. you want to take one step out of the process and have the teachers bring the guns there for the kids.

plus, you're opening up a huge can of worms the first time a teacher shoots a student. more guns = more gun deaths, it's the simplest damn equation in the world. whoever thinks more guns = less gun violence, is severely delusional imho.

---
■ Synchronet ■ telnet to utureland.grudgemirror.com and check out our website for a sneak pre

what i would like to see is a world where we are not all sitting ducks.

That sounds like a little bit of paranoia that's a warning sign someone might not be fit to own a gun. I might be a little hypocritical, but don't make enemies out of gun owners. If you and everyone believes that we live in a world where someone will snap and prepare 'defensive' arsenals in occurence with that fact, the odds of these 'immiment duck on duck on massacres'.

imagine how these people felt in these situations.

Again, not really appealing to my logical side. Imagine how any random duck plucked from history felt at the moment it died. Dying is sad. You can think about all the chickens that died for your nuggets, or you can just do what any and all animals will do which is eat rather than go hungry for principle.

taking away guns wont make these problems go away. someone will use knives, explosives or poisons.

Let's just say we agree on this, tomato = tomato. And I'm not in favor of just taking guns away, I'm just saying the paranoid lunatic afraid of goth kids on lithium doesn't do it for me. If you live in the Alaskan wilderness, you should be wary of wandering grizzly bear and strange punki-sh kids in your yard.

i'm totally for everyone having a gun.

Now let's go back to tomatos and birds and sitting around, and let's go ahead and strap some guns, bombs, poison, knives, and STD's on one set of birds, anyhow, set them loose, some mishaps are bound to happen. If they get in the air, they might do well to go against their instincts and abandon the flock just to avoid collateral damage. If they learn to control their weapon, as an informed user, they must have seen, felt and known its effects, and saw its utility to survive.

Anyhow, I am not a great weaver of elaborate portraits of birds with bombs, knives and poison on their backs, but essentially that is what I feel from the fear conveyed in the duck analogy. And you only would need a gun against a bird with another gun. It's multi-dimensional rock paper scissors, and by that there are both subjective and objective pyrric victories. By that I mean, that in the actor of violence or of anything is not the judge of whether their actions were right. That is a basic fact, and I'm talking about the legal system, not some nebulous moral code from the sky.

From an economic perspective, if you're for everyone having a gun, you either: a) want the government to give one to everyone and are a socialist
b) are selling guns
c) haven't thought it through

I'm not ruling out b or a, but if it's neither of those, then let me break it down for you. People who think they need guns will invest money in them. People who don't actually need guns buy guns, they don't spend enough on other things they need like food, shelter, medicine, and eventually they find themselves in a resource crunch. But lo and behold, they have a gun, which can magically make some problems disappear. Anyhow, to sum that point up, by creating a culture of irresponsible gun consumerism, your creating a recipe for crime, which would make sense if you b) are selling guns.

Anyhow, if you are a) a socialist and want everone to have guns, let me offer you like 33% congratulations on being on somewhat the right track. Otherwise, ducks are animals and people are too, and mostly they're concerned about eating things other than each other. Occasionally, a duck might go rogue and start attacking other ducks, but it's not problematic until he attacks a duck with poison in his fannypack or steals the assault rifle from the sleepy goose who everyone thought it was okay to give an assault rifle to because he's stupid
good natured and bigger than the ducks. Anyhow, just drop a tazer in the pond when dealing with rogue waterfowl is the point.

My point is, can't you be something bigger than a duck without a gun?

I'm not trying to say guns are bad point blank, but saying that everyone should have them and that schools should be stocked with them like pencils for safety and therefore we need more more more because it's not the guns that cause safety issues, it's the pencils, if we took away the guns, kids would be killing each other left and right with pencils, is a bad argument... it doesn't make me think that person is mature enough to have the power over life and death in their pocket.

If you are threatened, most people can call the police. If you are a criminal, then who cares if it's legal to own a gun, be a criminal. If I thought person A was going to shoot me, I would call the police. Then I would hire someone to stab him with a pencil in jail, after I had time to think it over. If you are afraid of the police and other people too, you might be paranoid, and people might be more afraid of you than you are of them. When you have a gun, you've already raised the intensity level of a situation.

The whole people scare me and i'm terrified/excited by death therefore i need a gun argument doesn't work for me. There aren't that many that do, but I do make exceptions for zombies and man-bear-pig and such. Hell, I even accept "I like to shoot cans and blow stuff up" on some occasions.

It's kinda like Star Wars, with the Dark Side of the Force, "there is much fear in you" etc etc to paraphrase. The Force is like a loaded Gun in your hands. We have nothing to fear but fear itself. If you're happy and you know it clap your hands. Happiness is a warm gun.

---
■ Synchronet ■ telnet to utureland.grudgemirror.com and check out our website for a sneak pre

From Cellguy@VERT/MSBGTN01 to LaRRy LaGoMoRpH on Fri May 2 13:34:37 2014

So what keeps a criminal from getting a gun if he truly wants one? NOTHING
So in your genius equation.. how are you going to keep guns out of hands of they people that don't need them? Think you can control a black market? You can't
Think that just stopping guns will end it all... Sorry, Wrong again

Gun control hurts law abiding citizens.

Yes, kids can get the guns from their parents but it up to the parents to keep them locked up in out of reach. Responsible gun ownership is key.

I carry a gun nearly every where I go, Openly. If more people carried firearms, gun deaths from idiots would go down. The reason schools and movie theaters are easy targets is they know nobody is going to stop them (SHOOT BACK!) Carrying SAVES lives!

Do you recall the shooting in the schools? If teachers were carrying consealed weapons many lives including the teachers lives would be saved.

ummm... totally wrong answer. these kids aren't even allowed to buy guns, they get them from adults who have too many to keep track of and bring them to school. you want to take one step out of the process and have the teachers bring the guns there for the kids.

plus, you're opening up a huge can of worms the first time a teacher shoots a student. more guns = more gun deaths, it's the simplest damn equation in the world. whoever thinks more guns = less gun violence, is severely delusional imho.

---
■ Synchronet ■ telnet to utureland.grudgemirror.com and check out our website for a sneak pre

what i would like to see is a world where we are not all sitting
ducks.

That sounds like a little bit of paranoia that's a warning sign someone might not be fit to own a gun.

i'm not paranoid. i'm sick of seeing news about nutcases going on killing rampages. seems like its every week.

I might be a little hypocritical, but don't
make enemies out of gun owners. If you and everyone believes that we live in a world where someone will snap and prepare 'defensive' arsenals in

i'm not anti gun.

imagine how these people felt in these situations.

Again, not really appealing to my logical side. Imagine how any random
duck plucked from history felt at the moment it died. Dying is sad. You can think about all the chickens that died for your nuggets, or you can

that's a real stupid analogy when i am saying imagine how these shooting victims felt when they were pinned in and defenseless and you bring up mcnuggets. maybe YOU need to work on your logical side.

Now let's go back to tomatos and birds and sitting around, and let's go ahead and strap some guns, bombs, poison, knives, and STD's on one set of birds, anyhow, set them loose, some mishaps are bound to happen. If they

I have applied for a concealled carry permit here in California. There is at least a 1 year wait for the processing. But wait I will. After I do get the carry permit, and find someone in trouble I will be able to help. Guns are not the problem... I fear when it happens, I will not have the tool to help someone in need.

Who out there would carry a concealled firearm?
Richard Claunch SeldomBBS website SeldomBBS.Com telnet seldom.synchro.net

I have applied for a concealled carry permit here in California. There is
at least a 1 year wait for the processing. But wait I will. After I do get the carry permit, and find someone in trouble I will be able to help. Guns are not the problem... I fear when it happens, I will not have the tool to help someone in need.

Who out there would carry a concealled firearm?
Richard Claunch SeldomBBS website SeldomBBS.Com telnet seldom.synchro.net

I have applied for a concealled carry permit here in California. There
is at least a 1 year wait for the processing. But wait I will. After I
do get the carry permit, and find someone in trouble I will be able to
help. Guns are not the problem... I fear when it happens, I will not
have the tool to help someone in need.

---
■ Synchronet ■ telnet to utureland.grudgemirror.com and check out our website for a sneak pre

From Bill McGarrity@VERT/TEQUILAM to LaRRy LaGoMoRpH on Sat May 3 10:26:00 2014

LaRRy LaGoMoRpH wrote to Richard Claunch <=-

I have applied for a concealled carry permit here in California. There
is at least a 1 year wait for the processing. But wait I will. After I
do get the carry permit, and find someone in trouble I will be able to
help. Guns are not the problem... I fear when it happens, I will not
have the tool to help someone in need.

A gun is tool. Most persons in the world are good... It is the persons that rob the 80 year old 80 pound woman for her hand bag and beat her to death because they only found 18 dollars and 23 cents in the bag. It is the wacko that walks into the mall and shoots 23 people because he was fired for being late 17 times. It is the long road in the middle of no where and a flat tire happens to my family and I am stopped changing it. It is also the second amendment. These are a few reasons to own firearms.
Richard Claunch SeldomBBS website SeldomBBS.Com telnet seldom.synchro.net

So what keeps a criminal from getting a gun if he truly wants one? NOTHING So in your genius equation.. how are you going to keep guns out of hands of they people that don't need them? Think you can control a black market? You can't
Think that just stopping guns will end it all... Sorry, Wrong again

Gun control hurts law abiding citizens.

Yes, kids can get the guns from their parents but it up to the parents
to keep them locked up in out of reach. Responsible gun ownership is
key.

Above you state the criminals will always get guns. I completely agree. But that makes your last statement completely moot, since 100% of people are NOT going to be responsible owning guns. You see, neither one can be stopped. Criminals will always find a way to get a gun, just as irresponsible gun ownership will always occur. Neither side of the fence is a true winner, but both sides have equally important arguments.

I carry a gunnearly every where I go, Openly. If more people carried firearms, gun deaths from idiots would go down. The reason schools and movie theaters are easy targets is they know nobody is going to stop
them (SHOOT BACK!) Carrying SAVES lives!

If more people carried guns, more idiots would also have guns. Some of the people carrying ARE the idiots.

Just as "Carrying SAVES lives!", carrying can also end lives.

What ever happened to settling matters the old fashioned way with your fists? Now all of a sudden everyone wants to bring guns to "be a bigger man?" Pfft.

I have applied for a concealled carry permit here in California. There is
at least a 1 year wait for the processing. But wait I will. After I do get the carry permit, and find someone in trouble I will be able to help. Guns

wow that's a long time.

i checked into this for wisconsin and most people are getting it 1-2 weeks. they say officially a 10 day wait.

Do you recall the shooting in the schools? If teachers were carrying consealed weapons many lives including the teachers lives would be save

ummm... totally wrong answer. these kids aren't even allowed to buy guns, t get them from adults who have too many to keep track of and bring them to school. you want to take one step out of the process and have the teachers bring the guns there for the kids.

plus, you're opening up a huge can of worms the first time a teacher shoots student. more guns = more gun deaths, it's the simplest damn equation in th world. whoever thinks more guns = less gun violence, is severely delusional imho.

This is the same as Air Marshals, Heaven help us when an Air marshal shoots a innocent passenger, or Brings down a plane becuase of his/her actions.
The Malaysia missing plane could have been caused by the actions of a Air Marshal. (It's a Possibility)!

---
■ Synchronet ■ DOS-ARCHIVE - dos.bbsindex.com

From Lab Rat@VERT/TOXIC to Richard Claunch on Sun May 4 14:05:24 2014

Do you recall the shooting in the schools? If teachers were carrying consealed weapons many lives including the teachers lives would be saved. I believe personal crime would be much lower.

As a Brit married to an American living in England, I find the whole firearms debate very interesting.

It's no secret that firearms are extremely restricted here. Most air weapons are legal and rarely require any sort of licensing. All handguns are illegal without exception. The only people permitted to carry handguns are the police (it's a common misconception that British police are unarmed). Rifles and shotguns are legal with the correct licensing and storage etc, but very few people own them. Of course, that doesn't mean that criminals don't have guns - if someone wants to get hold of a gun, they will and do, but shootings here
are very rare.

There has only ever been one school shooting here (Dunblane in 1996), and random mass shootings in public are also rare. The last was in 2010, and prior to that was 1987. Individual, isolated shootings do happen, but are also rare.

I have worked full time as a paramedic in the second largest city in the UK (Birmingham) for 9 years now and have never once been to a person who has been shot. Knife crime is reasonably common here and I have seen plenty of stabbings, some fatal, but never a shooting. It is illegal to carry a knife with a blade longer than 3 inches without reason.

Moving to the US has always been a consideration for me and my wife, and I've always wondered whether I would get a gun or not (properly licensed). My wife is very anti-firearms, which surprises me for someone who grew up on a farm in Ohio but probably has something to do with her liberal arts background...

what i would like to see is a world where we are not all sitting ducks.

That sounds like a little bit of paranoia that's a warning sign someone might
not be fit to own a gun. I might be a little hypocritical, but don't make enemies out of gun owners. If you and everyone believes that we live in a world where someone will snap and prepare 'defensive' arsenals in occurence with that fact, the odds of these 'immiment duck on duck on massacres'.

Okay. Allow me to interject. I have been a boyscout. I believed in those key principles and values down to the core. Although I rejected my adoptive parents' brainwashed friggin' cult money for fire 'n brimstone scam, I saw no hypocrisy in those things. Those were people being Chivalrous. The same
kinds of qualities that the Army teaches, and leans on so unbelievably heavily (see also Honesty, Loyalty, Integrity, Duty, Honor, Selfless Service, and Leadership). They were examples of people simply trying to be the best possible
individuals to themselves and their fellow human beings (and other lives, one would pray!). Surely no god would disapprove of such.
You don't want anybody to own guns, but the ones you're worried about, you claim, are the criminals. Well, let me ask you: since when do criminals care
what authority tells them what to do? If they're already not listening to what the authorities are telling them what to do, why would it matter if they're your
enemies? Clearly they might be on PCP, psychotic doses of disassociatives, have
mental problems, or have a rage inside so bad that they've decided to take it out
on absolutely anybody that they can get their hands on. You saying you're the perfect disciple and you'd prefer to be there, stand in the way of an innocent life, and turn the other cheek only to hope that the gunman/gunwoman would stop after they splatter your head on the pavement because it gave them pause?

imagine how these people felt in these situations.

Again, not really appealing to my logical side. Imagine how any random duck plucked from history felt at the moment it died. Dying is sad. You can think
about all the chickens that died for your nuggets, or you can just do what any
and all animals will do which is eat rather than go hungry for principle.

Elephants bury their dead, and mourn them for the rest of their lives, calling the sounds that individually identify them to each other in their communities. Science: ever thought of looking into it for some of the answers that just maaaaaaaybe someone else has thought of and asked before, as well?

taking away guns wont make these problems go away. someone will use knives, explosives or poisons.

Let's just say we agree on this, tomato = tomato. And I'm not in favor of just
taking guns away, I'm just saying the paranoid lunatic afraid of goth kids on
lithium doesn't do it for me. If you live in the Alaskan wilderness, you should be wary of wandering grizzly bear and strange punki-sh kids in your yard.

Yes, let's take them all away and leave the monopoly on force up to the law enforcement and government officials, because they hire based on ability, aptitude, and job performance, every single time (unlike every other job position
in America), and the reports that came out about how the supreme court has ruled
it legal for law enforcement agencies to discriminate against hiring people with
'too much intelligence' because they 'have moral issues with certain types of orders' clearly are not true, and let's face it: anybody with an IQ of over 90 will always make the right choice, they'll never get bested by a criminal with an
IQ of 125, and those weapons will NEVER fall into a criminal's hand again.

Now let's go back to tomatos and birds and sitting around, and let's go ahead
and strap some guns, bombs, poison, knives, and STD's on one set of birds, anyhow, set them loose, some mishaps are bound to happen. If they get in the
air, they might do well to go against their instincts and abandon the flock just to avoid collateral damage. If they learn to control their weapon, as an
informed user, they must have seen, felt and known its effects, and saw its utility to survive.

Wwwwwwwwhat?

Anyhow, I am not a great weaver of elaborate portraits of birds with bombs, knives and poison on their backs, but essentially that is what I feel from the
fear conveyed in the duck analogy. And you only would need a gun against a bird with another gun. It's multi-dimensional rock paper scissors, and by that
there are both subjective and objective pyrric victories. By that I mean, that
in the actor of violence or of anything is not the judge of whether their actions were right. That is a basic fact, and I'm talking about the legal system, not some nebulous moral code from the sky.

Alrighty then.

From an economic perspective, if you're for everyone having a gun, you either:
a) want the government to give one to everyone and are a socialist
b) are selling guns
c) haven't thought it through

Or, you have other agendas that cannot be pushed forward without a populous panicked and afraid of its fellow citizens. There are so many unspecified things left out of this equation that it is quite ridiculous to even
entertain.

I'm not ruling out b or a, but if it's neither of those, then let me break it
down for you. People who think they need guns will invest money in them. People who don't actually need guns buy guns, they don't spend enough on other
things they need like food, shelter, medicine, and eventually they find themselves in a resource crunch. But lo and behold, they have a gun, which can
magically make some problems disappear. Anyhow, to sum that point up, by creating a culture of irresponsible gun consumerism, your creating a recipe for
crime, which would make sense if you b) are selling guns.

Dude.
How did they create that by selling guns, when before they ever sold ANYTHING, they were IMPORTING soldiers AND guns to clear the land of its natural
inhabitants in a policy of strict genocide? At Standing Rock, the soldiers of the US Cavalry crushed babies' skulls with their bootheels and rifle stocks to save ammunition. Violence and atrocity were here long before we figured out the
formula to gunpowder, and there will always exist a potential for them. Guns are
just one means to an end.

Anyhow, if you are a) a socialist and want everone to have guns, let me offer
you like 33% congratulations on being on somewhat the right track. Otherwise,
ducks are animals and people are too, and mostly they're concerned about eating
things other than each other. Occasionally, a duck might go rogue and start attacking other ducks, but it's not problematic until he attacks a duck with poison in his fannypack or steals the assault rifle from the sleepy goose who
everyone thought it was okay to give an assault rifle to because he's stupid
good natured and bigger than the ducks. Anyhow, just drop a tazer in the pond
when dealing with rogue waterfowl is the point.

I can withstand a tazer, pepperspray, and CS gas or teargas. I've got mad skills given to me by US Army training.

I'm not trying to say guns are bad point blank, but saying that everyone should
have them and that schools should be stocked with them like pencils for safety
and therefore we need more more more because it's not the guns that cause safety issues, it's the pencils, if we took away the guns, kids would be killing each other left and right with pencils, is a bad argument... it doesn't make me think that person is mature enough to have the power over life
and death in their pocket.

Well it'd certainly help Darwinism get a foothold in purifying our species again, wouldn't it? *waits eagerly for the reply on this one*

If you are threatened, most people can call the police. If you are a criminal,
then who cares if it's legal to own a gun, be a criminal. If I thought person
A was going to shoot me, I would call the police. Then I would hire someone to
stab him with a pencil in jail, after I had time to think it over. If you are
afraid of the police and other people too, you might be paranoid, and people might be more afraid of you than you are of them. When you have a gun, you've
already raised the intensity level of a situation.

I have _BEEN A COP_ on _CIVIL ORDER/LAW ENFORCEMENT DUTY PATROL_ for years, previously. Police don't come to the scene until they're confident that they have the numbers to do it safely, or the equipment to do it safely. The supreme court has ruled that they have no constitutional obligation to put themselves in harm's way to rescue someone in need. (Funny, I thought that's what the most significant part of their job consisted of, when I was a kid, and it's precisely why I was interested in the field, unlike most powerhungry jackasses).
Police raise the intensity regularly. They raise it more than they need
to in order to intimidate to lower the amount of work (or so they think) that they need to take care of. A person to shank him with a pencil in jail? I think
you just proved that you're going to be supporting banning pointed objects and writing utensils in the future. An ignorant population is the only one that will
be safe! Keep the plans for guns, sharpened metals, chipped flint, obsidian fractures, and stone tools away from them!

The whole people scare me and i'm terrified/excited by death therefore i need a
gun argument doesn't work for me. There aren't that many that do, but I do make exceptions for zombies and man-bear-pig and such. Hell, I even accept "I
like to shoot cans and blow stuff up" on some occasions.

It's kinda like Star Wars, with the Dark Side of the Force, "there is much fear
in you" etc etc to paraphrase. The Force is like a loaded Gun in your hands.
We have nothing to fear but fear itself. If you're happy and you know it clap
your hands. Happiness is a warm gun.

Whayit?

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Guh up the effbomb down wif yr bad self; seriously. That means 'shut
the effbomb up, in the parlance of the first child I raised from birth
on . . . I recommend it because my patience with people that are only
interested in passing judgement and making pointless jabs without
knowing the exact facts about what they're dealing with is waning.
Consider yrself warned.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

I'll just respond to you Khelair, cause I like you, and I really don't mean to pick a fight on all gun ownership, but my general point is to Teachers and Guns.

I'll agree with you that atrocities have been happening all over the place for a long time. I think there are a lot of kneejerk reactions, and some of them are insane, and suggesting that teachers should be required to carry guns with the idea that it will prevent some sort of disaster is not logical.

By trying to put me in an emotional state over these things, it is an attempt to deflect from the logical components of the argument. The fact is you can fixate over the death of any creature and construe it as painful. That is the sort of argument intended for a jury and not a judge however. It is a statement intended to stir something more primitive than an informed reaction.

Anyhow, back to the argument with schools and guns, and rather than use birds as an analogy, I'll provide a few examples as to why kids shouldn't be surrounded by guns. Kids are already obsessed with guns, they play with them from a very early age. Kids, will cause trouble with anything: toilet paper, eggs, balloons, etc. If you didn't cause trouble when you were a kid, then you knew someone who did. Kids are immature. I remember electrocuting the teacher using the van de graph generator. I remember doing lots of stuff, and I wasn't even that bad. But kids cause trouble, and if you put guns in their reach, one of them will get to it and cause trouble. If you give a kid matches, he is going to start a fire.

Then contrast that with your typical teacher, who in my experience is typically laid back, liberal and is just trying to teach kids in the classroom and walk to hallways. I know personally if I were in that position and of that demeanor, I would feel like a gun made me and the environment less safe. The minute someone loses control of a gun in that circumstance is when it will become evident that the solution was more trouble than the problem.

I see this attitude with gun owners in America, and it is an attitude of 'the cat's out of the bag'. Anyhow, imagine if the world took that approach to Nuclear weapons. Anyhow, I would argue that the cat is not completely out of the bag yet. We have not reached a point where an increase in supply to the gun pool will result in a nil increase in the marginal death rate.

Were a teacher to have experience in security, and be held to a higher standard of accountability, than I have no objection for local schools to assess the needs of their constituents and make reasonable hiring practices in alignment with the educational and safety goals of the school. I am not opposed to those teachers even receiving a premium on their services, should the local zeitgeist compel the school to incentivize the position monetarily. I might even support such a measure on a local level were such a case made to compel me that there was a need, and the solution was the most effective proposal to resolve the situation. Were I to have my vote, I probably wouldn't pay a premium for such a teacher, but I might not care enough to vote, but you never know, it just depends on the situation.

The only way that putting guns into teachers hands works is at a local level and with gun control. If you put guns in schools, you must have them in the hands of responsible people who are held to a higher standard of conduct than just Joe Blow Teacher.

When I see a person carrying a gun for defense when it isn't appropriate, I see an insecure person who is compensating by carrying the right to be judge, jury and executioner in their pocket. And it doesn't make me feel safe seeing people who are basically scaredy cats thinking they are vigilantes.

If you want to say imagine what so and so person felt like when they were killed by mr. killer, sometimes I try to think what mr. killer was thinking and felt. and i'm just guessing, that a fair amount of them thought they were being righteous vigilantes at the time.

If you want to pull on subjective heartstrings to make an argument as far as getting a weapon goes, then I have a right to question the objectivity of a person when it comes time to make a rational decision in a split second.

Honestly, I just think trying to put guns in the hands in the bunch of teachers is just throwing gas on the fire and doesn't make gun ownership look any more rational to me. Terrible things have happened for a long time, but the scale and response have increased with an increased supply of technology of two kinds, one to dissemeniate information and the other ammunition. Since I only have direct access to the former, and one could say that it's causual connection to deadly results is far less indirect than the latter.

Anyhow, I think when you try to boil things down to good and evil, you're really getting into subjective paradigms and you're not being logical. There are two things at work, life and death. Good and evil are abstractions and tools to manipulate the simple man.

---
■ Synchronet ■ telnet to utureland.grudgemirror.com and check out our website for a sneak pre

From Khelair@VERT/TINFOIL to LaRRy LaGoMoRpH on Mon May 5 14:18:20 2014

I'll just respond to you Khelair, cause I like you, and I really don't mean to
pick a fight on all gun ownership, but my general point is to Teachers and Guns.

Point noted. :) Sorry if I was unduly cranky in my original
post. I'm a bit sensitive on this issue; have been since I was a teen
and heard of Columbine going down for the first time. Wrote a letter
to the editor about that one that got published at the time.

I'll agree with you that atrocities have been happening all over the place for
a long time. I think there are a lot of kneejerk reactions, and some of them
are insane, and suggesting that teachers should be required to carry guns with
the idea that it will prevent some sort of disaster is not logical.

Well, I wasn't elaborating quite enough. Many teachers, no,
should not be carrying guns. They certainly should, if they are
considering being an armed security asset for the classroom/school, go
through weapons safety training, as well as be tested on how well their
weapons awareness [at all times] goes through a state significantly
long enough to ensure that they won't just 'get used to' having a
weapon on them without being aware of its exact location and vector
that its muzzle is pointed in at absolutely all times. If they show
any signs of misplacing this, they should be disallowed, much like how
a recruit is immediately 'taken down' by a drill sergeant if they are
EVER observed breaking the live-fire training rule of keeping that
muzzle pointed 'upwards and down-range' at ALL TIMES. They aren't
taken to the ground nicely, either, because that recruit HAS TO carry
guns to be a soldier. They're tackled, nary a thought to injuries that
may occur. It's the same as getting burned for the first time as a
kid; link pain with that accident, because that accident can cause
injury or death.
Anyway, I digress. My point is that teachers cannot be smacked
or tackled to the ground for that, so if they mess up, get someone
trained to handle security in that sector of the building. Also,
teachers shouldn't be paid poverty level or bottom of middle class
wages. Look up how much they're paid in the best educated countries of
the world. They're paid as much as doctors. And why shouldn't they
be? They're educating the people who will BE the doctors, scientists,
lawyers, judges, cops, soldiers, etc. It gives you a whole different
skill set of people to choose from; more would likely be able to handle
a firearm, should it go with the job or be optional.

By trying to put me in an emotional state over these things, it is an attempt
to deflect from the logical components of the argument. The fact is you can fixate over the death of any creature and construe it as painful. That is the
sort of argument intended for a jury and not a judge however. It is a statement intended to stir something more primitive than an informed reaction.

Sorry. As I indicated before I went off more about the issue
than anything, and didn't bother to review the From: field. But yes, I
can fixate over the death of any creature and construe it as painful.
Whether that argument be for the jury, and not the judge, is quite
moot, IMO. Your argument is also for the jury, and not the judge. To implement your ideology, the voting public would have to approve, or at
least the majority of the voting elite.

Anyhow, back to the argument with schools and guns, and rather than use birds
as an analogy, I'll provide a few examples as to why kids shouldn't be surrounded by guns. Kids are already obsessed with guns, they play with them
from a very early age. Kids, will cause trouble with anything: toilet paper,
eggs, balloons, etc. If you didn't cause trouble when you were a kid, then you
knew someone who did. Kids are immature. I remember electrocuting the teacher using the van de graph generator. I remember doing lots of stuff, and
I wasn't even that bad. But kids cause trouble, and if you put guns in their
reach, one of them will get to it and cause trouble. If you give a kid matches, he is going to start a fire.

Yeah, the school analogy works better than the birds for me.
Heh.
I was bad. I don't know if I would've shot anyone, but there
are a few people that I would've had trouble not thinking about using
one on, were it available, for every day, the entire school year, yes.
I'm not saying that you're wrong at all. I'm saying that when
you have a person trained well, they do not make such a mistake. I've
seen that training in the Army. It's quite possible and feasible. You
just need a person with the ability to have self-control, discipline,
and focus.

Then contrast that with your typical teacher, who in my experience is typically
laid back, liberal and is just trying to teach kids in the classroom and walk
to hallways. I know personally if I were in that position and of that demeanor, I would feel like a gun made me and the environment less safe. The
minute someone loses control of a gun in that circumstance is when it will become evident that the solution was more trouble than the problem.

Training, ability, and attention to detail. These things can
all be measured by a skilled professional. If they're not capable,
don't arm them. If they're capable and able to lose control of the
weapon? Well, then, whoever they're going up against has more training
than would prevent one person from stopping a bit of an atrocity,
anyway. That person would've gotten to the kids before anybody would
call the cops easy as hell. Kids won't even all know to run in time
before there's more than 1 victim.

I see this attitude with gun owners in America, and it is an attitude of 'the
cat's out of the bag'. Anyhow, imagine if the world took that approach to Nuclear weapons. Anyhow, I would argue that the cat is not completely out of
the bag yet. We have not reached a point where an increase in supply to the gun pool will result in a nil increase in the marginal death rate.

Research the Swiss Army, or is it the Sweedish? The one with obligatory service where everyone gets sent home with arms. Then
research their violent crime statistics.

Were a teacher to have experience in security, and be held to a higher standard
of accountability, than I have no objection for local schools to assess the needs of their constituents and make reasonable hiring practices in alignment
with the educational and safety goals of the school. I am not opposed to those
teachers even receiving a premium on their services, should the local zeitgeist
compel the school to incentivize the position monetarily. I might even support
such a measure on a local level were such a case made to compel me that there
was a need, and the solution was the most effective proposal to resolve the situation. Were I to have my vote, I probably wouldn't pay a premium for such
a teacher, but I might not care enough to vote, but you never know, it just depends on the situation.

Well, that vote, along with other votes limiting teachers'
training, experience, and the attractiveness of the field to qualified applicants, hurts the human race in the long term. Sure, you're okay
now, but the next generation suffers.

The only way that putting guns into teachers hands works is at a local level and with gun control. If you put guns in schools, you must have them in the hands of responsible people who are held to a higher standard of conduct than
just Joe Blow Teacher.

I won't debate with that.

When I see a person carrying a gun for defense when it isn't appropriate, I see
an insecure person who is compensating by carrying the right to be judge, jury
and executioner in their pocket. And it doesn't make me feel safe seeing people who are basically scaredy cats thinking they are vigilantes.

People have blind spots. See all you like, that person may
have been involved in a violent crime that has occurred elsewhere and
lost a loved one due to a random act of violence. It's happened, and
made the news quite a bit.

If you want to say imagine what so and so person felt like when they were killed by mr. killer, sometimes I try to think what mr. killer was thinking and
felt. and i'm just guessing, that a fair amount of them thought they were being righteous vigilantes at the time.

Yes, that is dangerous in the hands of a deranged or untrained
person, such as Mr. I'm gonna shoot Travon Martin because I'm racist
and in charge of the Neighborhood Watch., no doubt about it. Too bad
there wasn't someone else with a gun nearby and a brain in their skull,
huh?

If you want to pull on subjective heartstrings to make an argument as far as getting a weapon goes, then I have a right to question the objectivity of a person when it comes time to make a rational decision in a split second.

Go ahead. I've done it, I've got the investigator's statement
on it, I've got a medal for saving lives and preventing an
international incident with cooperation from Ansbach Polizei.
It can be done.

Honestly, I just think trying to put guns in the hands in the bunch of teachers
is just throwing gas on the fire and doesn't make gun ownership look any more
rational to me. Terrible things have happened for a long time, but the scale
and response have increased with an increased supply of technology of two kinds, one to dissemeniate information and the other ammunition. Since I only
have direct access to the former, and one could say that it's causual connection to deadly results is far less indirect than the latter.

Down to brass tacks here, you may be absolutely right, _with
the system implemented as it is now_.

Anyhow, I think when you try to boil things down to good and evil, you're really getting into subjective paradigms and you're not being logical. There
are two things at work, life and death. Good and evil are abstractions and tools to manipulate the simple man.

Shall we change good and evil to altruistic/selfless/logical
vs. materialistic/reactive/emotional/selfish?

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Guh up the effbomb down wif yr bad self; seriously. That means 'shut
the effbomb up, in the parlance of the first child I raised from birth
on . . . I recommend it because my patience with people that are only
interested in passing judgement and making pointless jabs without
knowing the exact facts about what they're dealing with is waning.
Consider yrself warned.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

I liked your reference to the Swiss Army, but here in the United States, I'd say we probably damage our soldiers emotional and mental states more than in the swiss army, which makes it a less ideal situation. But I agree that training is a must, and even though I'm generally opposed to war, I'm not opposed to the idea of citizen's being drafted into some sort of civil service at a young age. But I am opposed to that paradigm within the current framework of the U.S...

Anyhow, as far as my argument being for the jury you're right. However, placing blame on the weapon to me is far more logical than whatever creeping 'evil' lurks in society. The result of that train of thought is you start blaming things like music, video games, drugs, bio-chemistry, ethnicity, etc. And then when you start deflecting blame away from gun ownership and use fear of the above to sell guns, you're creating George Zimmerman type situations. Although you did mention that if someone else had a gun it would have turned out differently... again, it is not good or evil. That's two deaths versus one.
While I didn't follow the trial, there were enough facts at face for me to have at least formed the opinion that it was the unneccesary work of a pussy. The law they have in Florida I'm not a fan of.

Shall we change good and evil to altruistic/selfless/logical
vs. materialistic/reactive/emotional/selfish?

That's definitely a valid point, we're on the right track. I think gun ownership has to be based on the principles of altruistic/selfless/logical paradigms. However, gun marketing and propaganda is catered towards materialism/reactiveness/emotialism/selfishness(I want to protect MY FAMILY/MY STUFF/MY VALUES/MY AMERICA). From an industry perspective,the gun industry can create the problem and the solution, and why would you want to support a business that literally is built upon blood from which the term "arms race" is literally from.

Anyhow, if you want to tumble the side arguments in with my own watered down opinion, I'd say I take issue with gun ownership being seen as a right and embedded in the consumer culture of America, same thing with video games, drugs, yada, yada. And that consumer culture is always passed down to children at an early age. I don't have kids, but I know that if you take em to the store they want to buy everything, toy guns not withstanding. Hell, the cause of a massacre might not be the gun, but some ad executive for a bubble gum company that made the killer like the popping sound. Getting a little abstract there... basically kids shouldn't be raised to want guns, people should be trained to want guns. They should require thorough convincing that they need one, and they should have to pass some sort of muster of convincing some third party, usually the government, why they need one, and have appropriate appeals processes etc. But I don't think it should be embedded as a right or a staple of modern 21st century life. I have no opposition should people walk around with muskets, but if they need automatic weapons, I have to question whether this was the founders intent.

I must eat dinner now.. ttfn

llmorphg

---
■ Synchronet ■ telnet to utureland.grudgemirror.com and check out our website for a sneak pre

From LaRRy LaGoMoRpH@VERT/GRUDGEDU to Khelair on Mon May 5 20:22:46 2014

I can just see the comedy movies made based on the above... Guy goes into a sporting goods store, applies to buy a 9mm, comes back when he's 80 years old. The clerk has to walk the gun out to his car, because he's doing good enough just to carry his crutches with him.... The clerk helps him into his car,
gives him the gun, helps him shut the door... The guy drives towards his state's capital. Ties a Rope around his neck with the pistol hanging on it. Walks up to the large steps at the capital. Ties another wrope to the
crutches and ties the other end to his belt loop. Crawls up the mountain of steps! Crawls on his hands and knees into the office of the Governor.
Unties the crutches and stands up. Unties the gun, and puts it in his hand, while his arm pits rest on the crutches. Puts it up and points it towards
the governor. (security raises their guns). He tells them "Get real! Do
you think I care about getting shot now? You'd be doing me a favor!" pulls
the trigger and shoots the governor. The security looks at the governor and says "Sorry chief! There's an 80 year wait period on our bullets. we didn't have enough money to buy both the required high powered pistol and the
modified sling shot, so we just got the high powered pistol." But don't
worry, 30 more years and we'll find that guy and shoot him!

This is the same as Air Marshals, Heaven help us when an Air marshal shoots a innocent passenger, or Brings downa plane becuase of his/her actions. The Malaysia missing plane could have been caused by the
actions of a Air Marshal. (It's aPossibility)!

Hmmm, Arm the Air Marshal with like 30 Tazer's. Just like the police use. Then, if the Air Marshal so much as thinks someone's got a gun, Taze him,
then hand cuff him and check him briefly for weapons. If a weapon is found, then the Air Marshal proceeds to fire 1 Tazer at the neck, 1 at each Knee,
One in the crotch, One in each Elbow, and another 5 or 6 where ever the Air Marshal feels like aiming. As the tazer's start to wear off, one by one, continously taze the guy until the plane lands and police can escort the individual off the plane. Word gets out of you doing this a few times and folks will not try to hijack a plane!

You step up and see all the dead bodies, and the cop handcuffing someone
and you assume that the SHTF, so you first contact your buddies to start
forming a mob. Then you see a tire iron on the ground, as you grab it and
beat the heck out of the cop, drag his body to the ditch and tie him up.
You cut the cuffs off the guy and tell him you saw everything, he was
improperly arrested by "the man", and he should come with you, where your
men are setting up a camp as you speak! He's a little fuzzy on understanding you right now, and thinks your inviting him to a video game party, so he says "Sounds like fun!" I'm on my radio, telling folks I'm
fixing to re-locate, because things are starting to creep me out. But before
I go, I figure I don't need these chicken bones in my truck, so I toss them
out on top of the cop. Later, someone comes by and sees the cop laying in
the ditch with chicken bones on top of him, and assumes he must have stuffed himself so much that he passed out. So no one bothers to help him up. Some dogs come by and see the bones, grab a few then pee on him.

|15 De>|10 Re|02:|11 Re: Teachers and Guns
|15 De>|10 By|02:|11 Access Denied |15to|11 Cellguy on |11Sat May 03 2014
|15 De>|14 02:10 pm
|15 De>
|15 De>|14 > What everhappened to settling matters the old fashioned way with your
|15 De>|14 > fists? Now all of a sudden everyone wants to bring guns to "be a bigger
|15 De>|14 > man?" Pfft.
|15 De>
|15 De>|14 So only strong and/or well trained people deserve self defence?
|10 Is there any laws regarding the carrying of a Flame Thrower in public,
and using it for self defense? I've yet to see any flame thrower that's
considered capable of being |15"|14Concealed|15"|09,|10 so I don't think
I'd need to worry about an open carry permit or anything like that...
Imagine, you walk into a store, the clerk cheats you out of 45 cents.
you say "You jerk! You owe me another 45 cents!" Then you whip out your
flame thrower and barbacue him! Oh I know, the store might make me pay
for damage to their cash register, counter, glass, cigarettes, safe, and
anything else... But after news gets out about that, I'm sure the rest
of the clerks will gladly round off my change to the nearest $1 or $20,
or heck even $100 bill, just to make sure to get me out of the store as
quickly as possible.

You step up and see all the dead bodies, and the cop handcuffing
someone
and you assume that the SHTF, so you first contact your buddies to start
forming a mob. Then you see a tire iron on the ground, as you grab it
and
beat the heck out of the cop, drag his body to the ditch and tie him up.
You cut the cuffs off the guy and tell him you saw everything, he was
improperly arrested by "the man", and he should come with you, where
your
men are setting up a camp as you speak! He's a little fuzzy on
understanding you right now, and thinks your inviting him to a video
game party, so he says "Sounds like fun!" I'm on my radio, telling
folks I'm fixing to re-locate, because things are starting to creep me
out. But before I go, I figure I don't need these chicken bones in my
truck, so I toss them out on top of the cop. Later, someone comes by
and sees the cop laying in the ditch with chicken bones on top of him,
and assumes he must have stuffed himself so much that he passed out. So
no one bothers to help him up. Some dogs come by and see the bones, grab
a few then pee on him.

Sound reasonable?

Perfectly! ;)
Knight

---
■ Synchronet ■ The Phunc BBS -- Back from the dead! -- telnet to bbs.phunc.com

From Froggyme@VERT/LILLYPAD to LaRRy LaGoMoRpH on Fri May 9 23:26:39 2014

What ever happened to settling matters the old fashioned way with your fists Now all of a sudden everyone wants to bring guns to "be a bigger man?" Pfft.

Regards,
Nick

Ain't that the truth. I remember throwing punches around and drinking beer with the same guys an hour later. Today we would be shot dead for just cursing at them. Damn I miss those bar room brawls. ;-)

You step up and see all the dead bodies, and the cop handcuffing someone
and you assume that the SHTF, so you first contact your buddies to start
forming a mob. Then you see a tire iron on the ground, as you grab it and
beat the heck out of the cop, drag his body to the ditch and tie him up.
You cut the cuffs off the guy and tell him you saw everything, he was
improperly arrested by "the man", and he should come with you, where your
men are setting up a camp as you speak! He's a little fuzzy on understanding you right now, and thinks your inviting him to a video game party, so he says "Sounds like fun!" I'm on my radio, telling folks I'm fixing to re-locate, because things are starting to creep me out. But before
I go, I figure I don't need these chicken bones in my truck, so I toss them out on top of the cop. Later, someone comes by and sees the cop laying in the ditch with chicken bones on top of him, and assumes he must have stuffed himself so much that he passed out. So no one bothers to help him up. Some dogs come by and see the bones, grab a few then pee on him.

Okay, normally I don't like role playing; I _DO_ like
writing fiction, however, and that has really got me wanting to add in.
I knew exactly what I was going to add to this before I caved in to the
urges for nini last night, but I haven't caffinated fully enough to
remember right now. ;) I'll try to remember to come back if memory
decides to clue me in anytime soon.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Guh up the effbomb down wif yr bad self; seriously. That means 'shut
the effbomb up, in the parlance of the first child I raised from birth
on . . . I recommend it because my patience with people that are only
interested in passing judgement and making pointless jabs without
knowing the exact facts about what they're dealing with is waning.
Consider yrself warned.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

the guy that does it is looking for cans or something and he does it at night and makes a LOT of noise.

Oh wow, it's real! I thought you were just pulling his leg, or speaking hypothetically, to keep the story going.

You do realize if he cuts himself looking for cans, he'll sue you. I had one freaky time working in Sulphur, LA at a gas station. First off, there
was this cop that reminded me of Barney Fife... Scrawny little guy,
constantly swayed around the place. Couldn't stand still for nothing... And
a young woman also worked there... I hate to say it, but in a hostage situation, I think I'd rather have the young lady in a stand off than the barney fife! If Barney showed up and I had a gun to my head, I'd give up
hope right then! But one night, this old guy was drunk and smoking next to
the gas pumps. He wanted to dig in the trash too... He kinda got me worried, so sadly, I called the cops... Last thing I wanted was him to set the trash
can on fire next to the gas pumps! I had another guy who sat at the end of
the parking lot facing the store. He worried me sick till a customer come in and asked if I could call the cops on him, because he was slumped over the steering wheel asleep. I told them "With Pleasure, he's freaking me out!" I thought he was watching the place, looking to rob it. Come to find out, the guy took a bunch of Niquil, drove down to the store, and fell asleep in the car. That's when the nice cop let both of us know then and there that he
could have gotten a ticket for Driving Under The Influence, regardless of
what he took to impare his ability to drive. He had someone come pick him
up, they moved his car to a better parking spot, and he got off without any ticket. He did say he was sorry for causing everyone problems. ;-) Lucky
he didn't fall asleep in the middle of the street! I had someone else that
got somatosed that seemed kinda similiar, but they was just standing up at
the counter, and while awake they didn't respond to anything... Stupid cops didn't know what it was, but the paramedics seen it and knew right off the
bat they over-dosed on Somas... Dumb cops thought they where having a
seizure, or tired...